Recent SRF German public broadcasting commentary on climate change has reached a new low in quality and a new high in activism, two respected German scientists say.
By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(Text translated/edited by P Gosselin)
“Climate-alarm propaganda day”
November 29, 2017, was once again a climate alarm propaganda day on the German public television and radio stations of SRF (Süddeutsche Rundfunk).
But it was even more shocking to see the primitive level of argumentation used there to fan fear among the public. For example, this video clip here is designed to refute climate skeptics.
Unfortunately, it represents intellectually subterranean SRF alarmist theater, using arguments as a “hammer against skeptics.”
1) Shrinking mountain glaciers
Bingo. Yet no one is challenging that it has been getting warmer since the end of the Little Ice Age beginning in 1850.
But why was nothing said about how the melting glaciers of today are uncovering tree trunks from even warmer periods of the Holocene and that as a result, the glaciers back then were at much higher elevations and smaller in size than they are today?
2) Climate change was not invented by the Chinese
OMG! – Seriously? – Was that meant for real?
3) There is no climate change pause
In the diagram, only the peak of the last El Nino of 2016 is represented. The decrease in temperature since then and the term El Nino is not mentioned at all in the explanation.
4) The polar bears are doing just fine…But they are really not doing okay because of the supposedly melting ice.
The chart shown interestingly looks only at a few areas where the numbers are expected to fall and ignores the fact that the populations have developed normally or well over the recent years, despite the reduced ice coverage.
5) Skeptical scientists are only 12%, environmental scientists
…who according to the SRF are the only ones who should speak up publicly on the matter, and only 0.1% are climate scientists.
More than 90%, however, are convinced climate alarmists. Missing here is only the famous 97% from Cook et al. Here we suspect that the word got around even at SRF studios that the magical 97 percent figure is a merely senseless bogus number…
The manipulative character of the agitation is demonstrated by the fact that the most important arguments held by climate skeptics aren’t even mentioned.
For example, the fluctuating, long-term solar activity in combination with the amplification mechanism as to Svensmark; the oscillating ocean currents on decadal scales; the obviously hyped CO2 climate sensitivity in the IPCC models; the refuted water vapor feedback and finally the inability by the CO2 alarmists to successfully model the strong natural variations of the Holocene climate.
Read more at No Tricks Zone